Farookh Abdullah thinks Jammu is a law and order problem – deja vu?

Posted on August 2, 2008. Filed under: India, Kashmir, Politics |

Sometime ago I had speculated that the Jammu agitation, led and inspired definitely by the non-Muslim majority in the Jammu portion of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, will be learning from the successful Kashmiri Muslim agitation to assert the right of religions to claim territories and virtually cleanse areas ethnically. However, they will not get the support of the Centre who thinks Muslim electoral support would be crucial in an otherwise most uncertain electoral scenario. So as predicted, the Jammu agitation continues, but the Indian state shows sufficient firmness that it never managed when Islamic agitators came out on the streets of “Muslim” Kashmir, or when Hindus in the Muslim dominated part were “cleansed”.

Farookh Abdullah, the ex CM of the state, had a remark of infinite wisdom, “the administration has shown weakness in handling the situation, and should have treated the agitation much more firmly”. Wonderful, Mr. Abdullah, is this deja-vu for you? Did you fail to show “sufficient” firmness in your state in dealing with your co-religionists – maybe, as otherwise the whole Kashmir situation would not have deteriorated!

If Kashmir is unified under Pakistan, it is one step forward in the Pan-Islamic consolidation of the Indian subcontinent, and eventual liquidation for all other cultures and imposition of an unthinking, retrogressive, medieval theocracy.

If Kashmir is split formally between India and Pakistan, as long as Pakistan exists, its feudal elite will try and continue to destabilize the Indian border (surplus population to be sacrificed is never usually a problem with Islamic cultures, and men are brought up under orthodox Muslim education to expect the best of earthly “consumption” in paradise when they die fighting for Islam).

If Kashmir becomes an independent country, it will become the base for launching continuing Islamic forays into India, and a much better connection with China which can then try and penetrate further into the subcontinent. In the long run of course China will suffer badly, as the Pan-Islamic movement will spread its tentacles (probably it already does) into the Muslim dominated tribal areas of Yunnan. China is simply one of the hated “tribes” of unbelievers for Islam, to be used tactically against other “unbelievers” until Islamic military strength remains weak. An independent Kashmir will also have officially greater manipulative power in obtaining international support from forces jealous of India.

Only one way is going to be the long term solution for India. Unification of the two Kashmirs, and the two Punjabs as two federal states of India. This will bring the sources for extremism under state supervision and penetration, and the basis for this extremism – the feudal and medieval socio-economic power structure could be broken up. This should also be actually a great relief for the ordinary Pakistani Kashmiri or Punjabi, as they will enjoy a much greater freedom to develop and modernize under a properly unbiased Indian government (that is a feat, I agree, still not achieved by Indian democracy, but if anyone can it is the Indian democracy which can, and not the feudally organized regimes in Pakistan) having sufficient political will to ignore and if necessary crush obstructing religions and concentrate on modernization.

Advertisements

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

11 Responses to “Farookh Abdullah thinks Jammu is a law and order problem – deja vu?”

RSS Feed for Dikgaj’s Weblog Comments RSS Feed

It is most foolish remark of a politician. he did not say the same thing when similar thing happened in srinagatr.This is how agitation has been fuelled by mindless govt and politicians,

Being a Pakistani…and a peace loving person.

I think Kashmir should become a no border area…Like a border around Kashmir but it is open for both Indians and Pakistanis to go to without visas and no army involvement from either side.

Like U.A.E and Oman have Burhami…I think it would open up tons of trade for both India and Pakistani people and benefit the people of Kashmir by Tourisim.

Kashmir is beautiful and I think is just disgusting how both governments are handling the situation.

I just wanted to add here…

There are Hindu areas in Pakistan where Hindu people live peacefully and are not bothered lol…So I don’t think “Pan-Islamic consolidation of the Indian subcontinent, and eventual liquidation for all other cultures and imposition of an unthinking, retrogressive, medieval theocracy” is the agenda there.

Both countries are fighting for Kashmir because it is a great strategic point for the military. I do not think India & Pakistan will ever have a war again so its pointless for both governments to peruse Kashmir that way.

For the paradise like living conditions of Hindus in Pakistan look at this news item from BBC – I hope Sabature will not accuse BBC of being pro-Hindu http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6367773.stm

Here is a lengthy quote from a professional and academic department in a non-Hindu non-pagan dominated country about the state of Hindus in Pakistan:
[http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/mar/assessment.asp?groupId=77004]

Hindus are most concentrated in the Sindh province of southeast Pakistan (GROUPCON = 3). Before partition, most Hindus in present-day Pakistan were urban, highly educated and economically advantaged. However, most middle- and upper-class Pakistani Hindus immigrated to India after the 1947 partition of the sub-continent. Those that remained tended to be poorer and rural. Lacking the resources to organize politically (large numbers are bonded labor), Hindus have remained politically and economically marginalized in Pakistan. Hindus are a religious minority in a Muslim country. They and their temples have periodically been subject to violence at the hands of the country’s religious majorities (COMCO98X = 5). Some Hindu families faced the possibility of forced resettlement in 2003 when the Peshawar Cantonment Board in Pakistan gave notice to 70 houses occupied by Hindus for more than 130 years. The Cantonment Board accused the residents of illegally occupying government land and ordered them to vacate under the threat of force if they did not do so by the deadline (REP1203 = 2). A few Hindu men allegedly planning acts of violence during the October elections were arrested in 2002, and in 2003 a Hindu journalist was arrested (REP0102-03 = 1).

Hindus’ status within the country varies, in part, according to relations between Muslims and Hindus in India. When their kindred across the border destroyed the Babri mosque in 1992, for example, Hindus in Pakistan suffered as Pakistani Muslims stormed temples and attacked Hindus. Hindus are also suspected of being agents of the Indian government. As a result they are discriminated against both politically and economically (POLDIS03 = 4; ECDIS03 = 3). Hindus have been poorly organized politically, with no national political party (ORGCOH = 0). Furthermore, their identity is defined more by the dominant Muslim culture than by their own self-assertion (COHESX9 = 1). Despite this lack of political history and organization, Hindus have become increasingly vocal in the late 1990s (PROT98 = 3; PROT01 = 3), and have forged alliances with other religious minorities, especially Christians, to agitate for increased rights. A new alliance, called the All Pakistan Minorities Alliance (APMA), was formed in 2002 to help resolve problems faced by minorities groups such as Christians, Ahmadis and Hindus. An organization called the Pakistan Hindu Welfare Association and coalitions of Hindu panchayats (local councils of elders) have led in political organizing.

A major issue Hindus faced until 2002 was that of the separate electorates for Muslims and non-Muslims. In the system of separate electorates, members of religious minorities could only vote for members of their group, which resulted in their marginalization in the National Assembly. The Pakistan Hindu Welfare Association convened a national conference on the issue in December 2000. In 2001, Hindus, Christians, and Ahmadis successfully conducted a partial boycott of the elections. In 2002, Musharraf granted religious minorities the right to vote for mainstream general seats of National and Provincial assemblies, which they did in 2002. While this was definitely a positive step for the well being of Hindus and the democratization of Pakistan, it remains to be seen how this will affect their overall status.

Protection from communal violence and economic opportunity (and the status of Hindu bonded labor) also are important issues for the Hindu community in Pakistan. Hindus, like Christians and Ahmadis, have also been disproportionately affected by Pakistan’s anti-blasphemy laws. Hindus in India, and the Indian government, frequently lambast discrimination against Hindus in Pakistan. However, they have extended little more than rhetorical support, perhaps sensing that more than that would endanger rather than aid Pakistani Hindus. Additionally, international anti-slavery organizations have lobbied for the end of bonded labor in Pakistan, but have not undertaken “redemption” efforts for Hindu bonded labor as they have for some other groups (most notably, black Africans in Sudan).

thats politics for you…I dont blame it on religion.

Thats politics and not religion!!! And this from a Muslim??? Islam is claimed to be a “complete” religion, something that not only dictates the private actions and life of an individual, but how the society runs and most importantly politics is claimed to be an integral part of Islam!

So you are trying to tell me that every Hindu (Or what so ever religion you come from) is followed 100% by the people of that religion?

I have nothing further to say to this topic…But I leave you with a smile stressing that it is Politics and not Religion.

P.S. If you have not heard… they had a rally in Kashmir recently..I even saw boards saying ” We don’t want India. We don’t want Pakistan. We want independence”.

However both our governments are not allowing that. So it is as much a fault of your Government (where Hindus are and according to the Hindu Religion oppressing someone from independence is WRONG) your government should set Kashmir independent RIGHT NOW…

If not then your leaders don’t believe in your Hindu Teachings ;).

If you ask any historian he will tell you.

Islamic countries which follow the economic laws of Islam have a very strong economy.

Countries which follow the social laws have had very strong social and cultural values.

Even if you look today…THE DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM THAT THE U.S.A. BOASTS ABOUT IS BASED ON THE ISLAMIC STRUCTURE OF POLITICS.

Why does the U.S.A. Political structure fail? As claimed by The Presidents own religious adviser…it is because they don’t follow the Islamic system completely.

Dear Sabature,

For some strange reason, I have a feeling that, under different circumstances you and I could have been excellent friends, in spite of all the strong words we have exchanged. You have assumed many things about me, and I would request you to look at my About page. I still refuse to spell out my nationality, or religion (if any), since I have tried all my life to cross borders in ideas and identities. However, the only religion that still strongly claims that it is a total philosophy for society including politics – is Islam, others do not have such unanimity about claiming total control over politics among their sects.

In any case you assume that I am an Indian voter and a Hindu to boot, who has elected a “Hindu leadership to the Indian Government”! My views on Kashmir has been quite clear -(1) the instrument of accession of Kashmir to the Indian Union is legally quite clear and valid and if the current logic for independence is accepted then similar arguments have to be accepted for the Balochs too [you can compare both signed instruments of accession, they both belong to a common draft used by the transitional British Government] (2) non-Muslims of Kashmir had been ethnically cleansed from the Kashmir Valley [irrespective of whether New Delhi behaved as Hindu or not!] and systematic destruction of Hindu cultural sites have been going on in Muslim dominated areas from 1967. In any case, I have stated quite clearly in my About pages that I am against the spread of Islam as a philosophy and I firmly believe that it should go from the subcontinent as a philosophy but not the people who should simply come out of Islam. Since Islam in Kashmir has shown its real intentions of eradicating non-Muslim cultures, it is the turn of non-Muslim cultures to return the favour.

Sabature, you yourself mentioned that as a migrant from India, and as an educated Pakistani, you could have been a target during Bhutto’s times or post Musharraf. Non-Muslim migrants from Pakistan or Bangladesh after the partition or the wars into India, might have caused some social discomfort but they were never targets. Frankly Sabature, even now, seeing the many successful faces of Muslims in the creative world of Western India surrounded by apparently “fanatic Muslim-oppressor Hindu”, have you never ever wished that you were still in India or that your ancestors had remained Hindus?

As for economics in Islamic countries, few outside having oil and natural gas resources are thriving economies – Both Malaysia and Indonesia, showed how weak their economies were in case of global financial shocks – starting with the late 90’s “East Asian forex crisis”.

Here is item no. 24 from Malaysian Technical Cooperation Programe (MTCP) document describing OIC situation over the last few years:
http://portal.miti.gov.my/cms_matrix/contentPrint.jsp?id=com.tms.cms.article.Article_1abaf1de-7f000010-5e095e09-b7e7a6ca&paging=0

“Such efforts will be pivotal in assisting the development of the Islamic community, which is approximately 1.3 billion strong, and represents 21 per cent of the global population spreading over continents of Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America. This is important as the total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Islamic countries are not proportionate to their population size. In fact, 29 out of the 57 OIC member countries are still categorised as ‘least developed’ countries. It is hoped that programmes such as MTCP, will contribute towards capacity building in the area of trade.”

Whether society is “strong” or not is a much more debatable and “value”-based issue. Here is a list of “Islamic countries”

Afghanistan
Algeria
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Benin
Brunei
Burkina Faso
Cameroon
Chad
Comoros
Djibouti
Egypt
Gabon
Gambia
Guinea
Guinea Bissau
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jordan
Kuwait
Lebanon
Libya
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Mauritania
Morocco
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Palestinian Autonomous Territories
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Tunisia
Turkey
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
Yemen

Think of the penalties meted out to women who happen to be at the “wrong” end [women appear to be mostly in the wrong end] of Islamic justice in Nigeria, Uganda, or even Pakistan where sometime ago even the MQM came out with a statement against “Karo Kari” – implying that it is a widespread social practice – could seem to be the feature of a “strong society” to a certain type of Muslim, but could appear to be medieval, barbaric, and a sign of weakness of the social system to most non-Muslims.

farukh abdullah is grat leader of jammu and kashmir he could be handle law and peaceful in the state


Where's The Comment Form?

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: